Mandela

Movies that take their material from real life can be tricky.  Documentaries are often dismissed by the general public as boring in their relentless sincerity or too one-sided in their coverage.  Feature films that focus on the events of a real person's life ("biopics") can likewise be tricky.  Two recent biopics - Lincoln and 42 - dodge this problem by not trying to tell the whole story; instead, both films focus on a small, incredibly important, slice of the life of their subject.  (I reviewed Lincoln here and the Jackie Robinson film 42 here, by the way.)

Mandela: The Long Walk to Freedom takes another path.  The film attempts, in less than two and a half hours, to tell most of the life story of an incredibly influential, complex man.  Such a task cannot be completed in that time frame, although Mandela tries mightily.  Make no mistake - this is a good film and has much to recommend it - but it wobbles slightly under its own weight.  Then again, how could it not?  Nelson Mandela is nearly a creature out of myth.  An educated man who bristled under the yoke of a blatantly unfair society, he first sought to change the system peacefully, but eventually turned to violent means.  Arrested and convicted, he was imprisoned under harsh circumstances for 27 years, yet never surrendered his dream of a more just society.  From behind bars, he became a global force to be reckoned with, due in no small part to his commanding presence, sharp intelligence, and uncanny ability to listen and file information away.  Released, he became South Africa's first black president and (with former Archbishop Desmond Tutu) established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to help heal the deep, festering wounds left by apartheid.  It's all too easy to make Mandela into some sort of saint who spent his time on Robben Island quietly contemplating the birds in flight.

Director Justin Chadwick tries hard to resist the pull of a simplified myth and this Mandela (played magnificently by Idris Elba) has some warts.  He's a skirt-chaser early in life and his unfaithfulness, as well as his near-constant absences from home, led to the breakup of his first marriage.  He's also a shrewd politician - notice how Mandela listens to everything and often says very little.

Elba is a wonderfully accomplished actor who has brought a certain gravitas to his recent roles, including Heimdall the Guardian in the Thor franchise, but this role is a whole new level and Elba rises to the occasion.  The same can be said for Naomie Harris, who played Eve Moneypenny in the recent Bond flick Skyfall.  That was a fun role, to be sure, but sensitively portraying Winnie Mandela, who embraced violence in the name of social change long after her husband nigh-miraculously renounced it - well, that's a job to be proud of.  The film does a good job of showing just why Winnie Mandela was led to continue advocating violence - it's not just something that happens, but it is a stark reminder that we so often make our own monsters.  She chose necklacing to silence her political opponents; he chose the ballot box.  While South Africa continues to have problems galore to deal with, the country is much better off for Mandela's leadership during that crucial time.  Go see this movie.


(By the way, following Mandela's death in early December, I was shocked (for in many ways, I remain naive) at the vitriol and sheer hatred that poured forth from some of the human family who denounced Mandela as a communist and terrorist, thereby completing ignoring (1) the sheer inhumanity of the apartheid regime, (2) the desperation people can be driven to, and (3) the role politics plays in history.  Chadwick's film is not perfect, but it's well worth seeing.  It's likely to spark some uncomfortable discussions and that's a very good thing, for history does not disappear by being ignored. Instead, it becomes twisted and distorted, thus requiring a good cleaning.  And truth is the best disinfectant.)

Of Gates and Hammers

This post covers two new releases - Ender's Game and Thor: The Dark World.  Look, I wanted to be excited about these - especially Ender's, but I fear there is little joy here.  Let me be clear - both of these films are solid efforts, but neither one really worked for me.  Let's discuss.

Nope, the gate's still up.

First, Ender's Game. This was always an ambitious project, which might explain why the book was published in the mid-80s and the film is just now seeing the light of day.  Orson Scott Card created an intricate, fascinating world with this series and I worried a bit.  It turns out that my anxiety on this one was well placed.  Too much of this rich narrative is skimmed over which pulls the punch from the ultimate reveal.  (Also, I need a re-read on this, but some relationships are just not quite right in this one, at least by my recollection.)  While the movie still makes some good points about whether or not war should have rules, what it takes to make a good leader, and the ethics of using child soldiers, this Game wastes some excellent actors and some very pretty effects. It isn't a hot mess, by any stretch of the imagination, but I grieve what could have been.  Director Gavin Hood (he directed X-Men Origins: Wolverine which alone says a few things) has not managed to breach the enemy's gate with this film.  Skip the movie and read the book.

(See - I didn't even get into Card's politics and let me tell you, that took some doing.  I myself am a little conflicted as I like the book tremendously but find Card himself to be - well, let's just say we disagree on some things.  Not sure what I mean?  Click here. For a view on whether Card's politics are affecting the box office, click here.)

Hammer?  No, but I've got some pliers.

Second, Thor: The Dark World.  This is a different kettle of Norse fish.  While Ender's Game expects a too-thin story to support too much weight, Thor's just having fun.  There's nothing wrong with having fun, and watching Tom Hiddleston strut and mock isn't a bad way to while away half an afternoon.  Provided you don't expect anything more than that, you'll be happy.  The Rainbow Bridge (Bifrost) has never looked better and Idris Elba's Heimdall is just cool.  He's far more menacing than Anthony Hopkins' Odin, which is a pity.  I mean, shouldn't you tremble when Odin sweeps into a room?  The story's thin, which is a shame, as I wanted to see Christopher Eccleston's Malekith glower and scheme and scare.  Instead, he's a generic bad guy who wants to destroy things Just Because.  He also picks up flawless English when the plot requires it.  This is not to pick on Eccleston - there were a lot of deliveries from the Plot Convenience Warehouse in this production.  Look, it's fun.  Buy your popcorn, say a little prayer of gratitude for the creative mind of Walt Simonson, and enjoy.

Then go to your local comic shop and buy the Simonson omnibus.

Smoke, Not Fire

This is the problem with pre-screening hype - it gets expectations up.  Instead of just having a nice little movie, it has to be the BIGGEST THING EVER!!  Instead of showcasing stylish framing and camerawork, it has to SHOCK YOUR SENSES!!  And instead of adding a puzzle piece or two to an existing storyline, it has to ANSWER ALL THE BIG QUESTIONS!!

Prometheus does none of those things, although much is promised.  It's not a bad film; in fact, director Ridley Scott shows once again that he knows how to both capture breath-taking beauty through a camera lens and how to create memorable environments for his characters to cavort within.  But ultimately, Prometheus is a movie that didn't need to be made, much less hyped to within an inch of its life.

The chief problem here is Alien, which shot Scott to A list stardom some thirty years ago.  (His position there was cemented with Blade Runner a few years later, a two-fer that made him a science fiction darling, if not a downright wunderkind.)  Alien is so good and stands up so well after all these years that . . . well, let's put it this way.  Alien is the horror equivalent of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird and Lee didn't write a sequel, prequel, or much of anything afterward.  It's not that Prometheus is bad; it's that it's not Alien, yet it tries to answer the questions Alien left unanswered.  Here's a tip, Hotshot.  There's no reason to answer them and trying to just feels forced.  There's a heavy patina of philosophy and theology coating Prometheus and it doesn't fit well.  It certainly can fit well in science fiction; in fact, I've said repeatedly that science fiction is a genre that is ideally suited to asking the Big Questions such as "What makes us human?" and "What really matters?"  But just because a film asks those questions doesn't make it a Good Film.


Alien is all about cramped spaces, shadowy things-that-want-to-kill-us, and figuring out how to survive as the crew are picked off, one by one.  (And a cat.)  Prometheus can't do that, because we already know what was a mystery in the first film.  We already know what the aliens are and how awful they are.  We already know the shape of the ship and the look of the bridge.  Wisely, Prometheus doesn't try to flat-out copy that.  We get a large cast of scientists who have followed cave paintings to a faraway moon in hopes of "meeting our maker."

The problems begin early.  The first scene, which is lovely and terrifying in turns, is not needed and removes any trace of mystery from the rest of the film.  The film further suffers from too large a cast - it never gels as an ensemble and there's not enough screen time to develop each character, so a few become throwaways.  The scientists aren't particularly curious about the alien civilization they've discovered, they are overly mercenary, and they make some deeply stupid decisions.  While Alien gave us Ellen Ripley,  Prometheus thinks simply passing the Bechdel Test automatically makes it a Worthy Film.  Charlize Theron's Vickers has daddy issues and Noomi Rapace's Shaw has way too much symbolism tied up in jewelry.  Alien gave us a treacherous android and a shadowy corporate agenda.  While Prometheus retains both, those elements have lost the power to shock us.  Oh, and sex is bad and pregnancy is a horror.


Prometheus is not without its moments, however.  Michael Fassbender as the android David is especially noteworthy and Idris Elba as the captain could be - I suspect there's a scene or two on the cutting room floor that should have been left in there on that score.  The scope and sweep of the cinematography is jaw-dropping and deliberately invokes David Lean (maybe a key to the android's name, now that I think about it), especially Lean's masterwork Lawrence of Arabia.

In short, Prometheus wants to be an Important Film and it tries mightily to be that.  Unfortunately, along the way, Scott substituted bombast for joy.